BONUS: Interviewing Two of Football Substack's Finest on Quarterbacks
Football Film Room's Nick Kehoe and Chief in the North's Seth Keysor on sitting quarterbacks, key traits for prospects, and the scaffolding needed for development at the position.
In researching my latest piece about how NFL teams look for their franchise quarterbacks, I decided to enlist the help of a couple of Substack’s best football writers.
is a former producer at the NFL matchup show and played quarterback at Amherst. Today, he runs , one of the best publications on Substack for on-field analysis and All-22 breakdowns. is an analyst who has written about football for the Athletic and SBNation. Seth writes , where he does excellent work on the Chiefs and football in general.I wanted to speak to Nick and Seth in particular because they are film people. Much of the analytical work done at Game Theory is statistical, but as I worked to understand how to properly evaluate quarterback prospects, it became clear that the numbers would only get me so far. Key to understanding the potential of quarterback prospects are things you can only find on tape: how they navigate a pocket, how they deal with pressure, their processing speed, and improvisational abilities. Nick and Seth spend a lot of time doing the best analysis of these traits anywhere outside an NFL front office (and perhaps better than some of those).
I also quizzed Nick and Seth on topics of quarterback development, including the benefits of sitting quarterbacks their first season(s), what makes an ideal environment for quarterback growth, and which skills key to success can and cannot be taught.
I hope you enjoy these responses as much as I did. They were a massive help in forming the iceberg beneath my last piece, and these answers will certainly provide the foundation for future ones. I am also a paid subscriber to both Nick and Seth, and I encourage you to consider supporting their content as well.
This interview was compiled by sending Nick and Seth similar questions over substack DMs and email. Check out the piece they contributed to here:
Me: In general, what do you think are the benefits of quarterbacks sitting year 1+? Are there benefits to QBs starting right away?
Nick: In my opinion, young quarterbacks should start as soon as possible. There is no substitute for learning by doing, and that’s particularly true at the quarterback position. You can’t simulate view from the pocket, the speed of the game, or the quick processing and decision making needed.
Yes, there are cases like Aaron Rodgers and Jordan Love, who both got to sit for 3 years. However, I have a hard time believing either quarterback would have been worse off with 16 or 32, or 48 extra starts under their belt.
Seth: The most obvious benefit to a quarterback sitting for a year or two is that you are limiting the “new” in their life and allowing for a slower adjustment to the NFL level. New town, new facilities, new coaches, new teammates, new system, new level of speed and talent of opponents… there are a lot of new things that a quarterback has to adjust to at the NFL level. By having them sit, you can in theory slow down that “new” and have them drinking from a faucet rather than a firehose. It allows them to get more comfortable with all the other stuff before trying to get comfortable with the additional pressures of gameday and weekly grind of being a starter.However, there is absolutely a benefit to starting right away in that certain things (like playing in an NFL game) are unknowns until you do them. Allowing a young QB to see what it looks like in real-time is the only way he can… well, see what it looks like in real-time. He (and the coaches) will be able to see what strengths and weaknesses show up in live action that perhaps don’t reveal themselves in a practice or preseason setting and allow for adjustments that otherwise could be total unknowns. How guys practice is not how they play necessarily, and there’s a chance you could go into a game not really knowing a lot about your QB on gameday. The additional benefit to starting a QB right away is you’re taking advantage of the rookie contract sooner rather than later.
Overall, to me, if you think the guy you’ve got is “the guy,” it’s better to get him on the field sooner rather than later and see what kinks need to be worked out when the action is real.
Me: Out of all the traits for Rookie QBs to possess, what are the most important for early success in the NFL? Are there traits that, if a QB were lacking, would incline you towards sitting them early in their career?
Nick: I wouldn’t necessarily say there are traits that would me inclined to want my quarterback to start right away or sit and learn. Really, it comes down to whether or not the quarterback can run the offense and whether or not his offensive line is good enough not to get him killed. If he can’t run a functioning offense or will get killed in the process, the experience isn’t worth it.
But there is nothing wrong with adversity. And if a quarterback can’t handle losing and adversity his first season, when he’s not supposed to succeed, how is he going to handle it when there are high expectations? I want to know that about him early.
For example, look at Trevor Lawrence. You could not put a quarterback in a worse situation in his rookie year than Jacksonville did. It didn’t derail his career, though, he bounced back. Now the Jags know he’s tough as nails and can feel confident giving him a big contract and building around him. Compare that to how Mac Jones handled his second and third years in New England. Besides physical talent, it’s not a coincidence that one quarterback is a starter with a bright future, and the other was just traded for a bag of footballs after three seasons.
Seth: I don’t know that the traits needed for success early are any different than the traits needed for success later. That said, one trait that can result in a QB being able to hit the ground running more quickly is playmaking (ie the ability to operate out of structure). No rookie QB is going to come in understanding the entirety of NFL-level defenses and disguises, so the short story is they’re going to get got sometimes from a mental perspective. They’re also going to be naturally a little slower processing stuff than their 10-year-veteran counterparts who have seen it all before. So what can you do when the play breaks down? If you can create, you can mitigate the damage done on plays you weren’t up to speed mentally.
The traits that would cause me to sit a QB at any point are the same as early in their career. You need some basic level of accuracy, pocket presence, and the ability to go through reads at some level as a baseline. If they don’t have those three things, they really shouldn’t be on the field.
Me: Intuitively, and from some preliminary research, I’m beginning to believe that early success for QBs hinges largely on Vision/Awareness/Reads. Examples that come to mind are how Brock Purdy seems to have excelled with these (along with accuracy) as his best qualities, and players like Zach Wilson and Justin Fields have struggled as a result of lacking these skills, despite superior playmaking abilities. I’m wondering how you feel about that idea and if you feel I’m missing anything big in that assessment.
Nick: I agree with your assessment about vision, awareness, and ability to recognize coverage being critical. However, I wouldn’t characterize that as something specifically needed for early career success. I think that’s needed at any stage of a career.
Seth: I think what you’re missing from the assessment is the system issue. Kyle S is terrific at making things easier on his QBs by providing them with set pre-snap and post-snap reads that they don’t monkey with much. That allows a young QB with accuracy and a calm demeanor (which Purdy has) to thrive because he’s not being asked to “figure out” what the defense is throwing at him. He’s being asked to execute Shanny’s stuff. The drawback to that is when Shanny’s system isn’t working, the young QB who looked awesome the previous week may not be able to adjust because he’s not really allowed to (see all the free rushers the Ravens and then Chiefs were able to dial up against the 49ers).
That said, you’re not wrong in terms of vision/awareness/reads being a crucial element. I’d boil it down to something as simple as a cool head in the pocket and a faster process to get where you need to go, along with consistent accuracy. That said, people are always going to wonder if it’s Purdy or (like Jimmy G before him) Shanahan is the actual brain while his QB is just an automaton.
Me: Do you feel like NFL teams overvalue play-making ability and undervalue some more fundamental ideas like throwing on time, getting through progressions, etc.? I feel like an aspect of what coaches feel they can most easily teach is key here, but seeing guys like Purdy makes me wonder if a high degree of skill in these areas is undervalued.
Nick: I do think play-making ability is overvalued to a certain extent. The quarterback has to be able to run the offense, get the team in the best play, protection, etc. read the defense, and get the ball to the right place on time. Those are the traits that lead to consistent, high-level quarterbacking. There are exceptions and some quarterbacks who can transcend that, but you can’t run your offense by telling the quarterback to go out and just run around and make a play. NFL defenses are too good to get beaten consistently by quarterbacks who can’t succeed from the pocket, particularly in the playoffs.
The traits that are most important to me are ball placement, anticipation, and pocket mobility. Ball placement isn’t just accuracy. It’s abut making the right type of throw to the right spot in relation to the defense, and it encompasses vision and coverage recognition. Anticipation includes ball placement, quick processing, as wass as the ability to understand where the defense is going to be in relation to the routes called. To me, it’s the #1 trait needed to be able to perform against any defense. It neutralizes great coverage and pass rushes. Then, pocket mobility, that’s the most important type of mobility. Can you move within the pocket, avoid the rush without entirely losing your base, reset your feet quickly if you do lose your base, all while keeping a downfield focus? This type of mobility buys time and allows the QB to access the entire field late in the play. Personal opinion here, but the quarterback with the best pocket mobility I’ve ever seen is Tom Brady. You don’t think of mobility when you think of Brady, but no one was better.
I do favor quarterbacks with a strong arm. The ability to make every throw is valuable and a strong armthat can threaten every square inch of the field has a profound impact on the defense, but the other traits mentioned above are most critical. I guess you could wedge arm strength into the ball placement categorysince it enables a quarterback to be able to make every type of throw.
Seth: We might be close [to overvaluing play-making], but I think for the vast majority of the NFL’s existence, it was actually the opposite. Teams valued far too much whether a player could operate “within the system” or “within the pocket” and didn’t realize that what often separated guys was the ability to make something happen when the system breaks down. There are players who are playmakers, players who are game managers, and players who are both. I think far too often teams (before Mahomes in particular) thought they had to choose between one or the other rather than realizing you can get both, just to different degrees.
That said, you really need both for an elite QB, the fundamentals for consistency and playmaking to raise the ceiling. And teams keep trying to shortcut it by finding one or the other.
Me: What statistics or measures do you look for when trying to quantify vision/awareness/reads or any of the other factors you feel are most important for rookie quarterbacks?
Seth: There are no statistics that can track that in my opinion. PFF and some other sites are trying in terms of sack rate and adjusted sack rate, but I’ve never seen any public-facing data that can adequately track it. What I have to do is chart each snap so I can see the routes vs the defense that’s called, along with the pass rush vs the pass protection, and how the QB reacts. There’s just no replacement for that I’m aware of at the moment, at least that I have access to.
Me: I know you [Seth] cover the Chiefs, and I’m curious how you think Patrick Mahomes’ season sitting behind Alex Smith benefitted him. I think of Mahomes as someone the Chiefs picked because of his playmaking ability, and Smith, given his “game manager” reputation (maybe unfair), might have moderated some of Mahomes' negative gun-slinging tendencies. How do you feel about that assessment, and what other feelings do you have about Mahomes’ development in KC?
Seth: I think that had Mahomes started from Day 1 he’d still be the absolute supernova that he is, he just wouldn’t have been as good in his first year starting as he was. Based on what I’ve observed, Mahomes didn’t really tamper down his “gunslinging” tendencies until about 2021 in midseason, when teams basically gave up blitzing him and started using conservative shells constantly. So I don’t believe Alex Smith had much to do with that. However, the benefit Mahomes got (and he’s been really public about this) was it shortened his learning curve for all the ”new” stuff I talked about previously. How does an NFL quarterback come to work, watch film, deal with the QB room, deal with his receivers and OL, media, etc? I think that, along with taking whatever tips were available about Smith’s experience in the league, were the biggest benefits.
Mahomes is a chameleon, and he’ll adapt on a game by game (and at this point in his career, play by play) basis to what is necessary. One snap he’ll throw the ball away when that maximizes the chance at winning (damage mitigation). The next he’ll check down. The next he’ll hit an in-breaking route in stride after an audible. The next he’ll scramble around for 20 seconds and create something out of nothing. That’s what he’s developed into, in bits in pieces, over the last few seasons; Every single variation of a winning quarterback. I wrote about that following this last SB:
https://mnchiefsfan.substack.com/p/patrick-mahomes-super-bowl-lviii
Me: What key environmental aspects do you consider when considering quarterback development? How important do you think Coaching, O-line play, and skill position play are to the success of the quarterback? Are some of these make-or-break aspects of development?
Seth: Coaching and OL play are the make or break aspects, and receiver play is the ceiling. You can’t just develop into a good QB on your own, and you can’t do it if you’re running for your life.
Me: If teams at the top of the draft are usually bad, and quarterbacks with high playmaking ability and “savior” potential are most valued and go to those teams, does this have a negative effect on the development of these Quarterbacks? When I think of Mahomes, I wonder if he is asked to start day one on a poor team, if he gets forced into indulging his ability to extend plays to a degree that he doesn’t learn to operate on time and in rhythm. I actually wonder if this happened to Josh Allen early on to a degree. What are your feelings on the effects on a developing QB on being in a bad situation?
Seth: I think it’s definitely a factor, but it all comes down to the coaching in that scenario. If the guy has the mental “speed” to pick up reads and protections, and the coach is teaching it, he’ll pick it up even if the situation around him is bad. There’s a talent aspect to that and it gets overlooked. Mental agility, as it were (or processing speed), is just as much a gift as blazing speed or an incredible arm. And in the NFL, the difference of a tenth of a second in processing speed can be the difference between a good QB and an elite one, a bad QB and an average one.
What a player is asked to do on gameday will definitely impact how he is PERCEIVED, to be sure, but I don’t know that it legitimately affects development the way people think it does. I think if the talent is there and the coaching isn’t bad, the development will occur and will show when the situation improves.
Me: What do you think about Caleb Williams’ day-one readiness in the NFL?
Seth: Like all QBs, it’s impossible to know for sure. But in terms of playmaking he’s the closest thing I’ve seen to Mahomes in both the ability to create and the consistency of that creation. He’s incredible in both, and it’s the latter especially (being able to make that special play not once per game, but half a dozen times) that impresses and reminds me of Mahomes. So if he lands in a situation where they’re able to give him 15 or so layups per game, he ought to be able to play well out of the gate. The ceiling will depend on that development of the mundane at the NFL level.
While Nick didn’t answer this question explicitly, he did write an excellent article on Williams here.
Thanks again to both Nick and Seth for taking the time for this interviews. You can find
at and .
Very nice piece Alex!